Social Capital vs. Internet: Are They at Odds?

The following is a post by WVU Communication Studies M.A. Students Betsy Ditrinco and Jennifer Seifert

Incredible advancements in technology coupled with growing technological adoption rates render the discussion of social capital and technology timely and salient.  Some suggest that technology might weaken our relationships while others suggest it creates and maintains ties in a fashion never before possible.  In exploring the relationship between social capital and the Internet, we argue that Internet is a worldwide network of weak ties which facilitate the sharing of novel information between groups and that the Internet and Social Capital are not at odds.

In his seminal work “The Strength of Weak Ties,” Granovetter (1973), asserts that interpersonal ties create a macro-micro link between small-scale interaction and large-scale patterns of political and community organization.  Granovetter (1973) defines the strength of an interpersonal tie as “the amount of time, the emotional intensity, the intimacy, and the reciprocal services which characterize the tie” (p. 1361) and characterizes ties as strong, weak, or absent. The diagram below represents the ties between several individuals. Person A and Person B are strongly connected; therefore, their networks and the information they share should be very similar. However, these strong ties are generally closed systems without new information and, similar to biological frameworks, when an ecosystem goes without resources from the environment, it will not grow.

Granovetter (1973) suggests that we need to rely on our weak ties for outside resources. Therefore, a weak tie (Person C), with weak and strong ties to others, can introduce new and unique information into the closed system of Person A and Person B.  Although this discussion is an incredibly simplified explanation of both Graovetter’s (1973) work and network analysis in general, the impact technology has on the communication of information is still evident.

Accepting the assertion that internet technologies create a worldwide network of weak ties has incredible implications.  For the first time, our technological society has the ability to not only share information through our unprecedented amount of weak ties, but also to express ideas to strangers (to individuals in which a tie is previously nonexistent). For instance, Person A and Person B may be having a discussion on Twitter which Person C, D, and E stumble upon. By searching for key words that are of interest to them- potentially spreading the message in a more rapid, unpredictable pattern.  The Internet has become a place of discourse in modern society but, many argue this has societal consequences.

In the early days of Internet accessibility to the general public, there were concerns that adaption of technology would result consequently recede from social involvement. For instance, Putnam (2000) in Bowling Alone discusses the concept of social capital (the networks of relationships based on cooperation, trust, and reciprocity). He argues that traditional mass media, because it is highly individualized and consumed in isolation, has contributed to the erosion of civic and community engagement that is integral to the development and maintenance of social capital.  His argument is based on television usage; however, one can see how his arguments centering on television (i.e., individualized and isolated consumption) have application to internet usage.  Yet, current data suggest the internet does not represent the decline social interaction.  In a longitudinal study of internet usage, Katz, Rice, and Aspden (2001), found that internet use is associated with increased socialability, increased face-to-face meetings with friends, and not associated with a decrease in time spent with family and friends. These findings suggest individuals who use the Internet regularly are still interacting on a social level and  that the use of Internet doesn’t mark the end of the relational ties. To the contrary, mediated communication might help us maintain our relationships near and far.

---

Jeremy Lin, Race, and Sport: The Prevalence of Racial Frames in Written Sports Content

The following is a post by WVU Communication Studies M.A. student Gregory A. Cranmer

Jeremy Lin, an NBA point guard and former undrafted free agent, has been thrust into the national spotlight after taking a sub-par New York Knicks team on a 7-0 run earlier this month. While the storylines of an undrafted free agent or former Ivy Leaguer selling out the “Garden” seems interesting, the majority of media coverage regarding Lin is racially focused. ESPN’s “A chink in the armor” headline regarding Lin’s first loss took the coverage of the first American-born NBA player of Chinese decent to another level. The headline featured a picture of a distraught Lin and was available on ESPN’s website for mobile devices for nearly 30 minutes before it was removed. The headline clearly had racial undertones, and the use of a racial slur in a headline for an athlete of another race does not seem as likely.

As a researcher with an interest in mediated sports coverage this story not only interested me greatly, but also parallels some of the main points of my thesis. First, the coverage of Lin demonstrates that the coverage of athletes is framed around their race. In my thesis, I focus on the use of brawn and brain frames to describe the successes of Black and White Heisman finalists and expect the established trend of Black athletes being framed as brawny and White athletes framed as brainy to continue.

Second, while there has been extensive research completed on racialized coverage of athletes in verbal commentary, written context has not been studied as often. The most likely explanation is that racialized coverage is easier to find in verbal commentary because it is live and requires commentators to continually fill air time under stress. However, that does not mean that written coverage isn’t racialized, as demonstrated by the Lin story. My thesis will also examine written content, specifically newspaper coverage. I decided to examine newspapers because written content is more powerful than verbal because in it is filtered through many channels (e.g., editors, unlike verbal commentary). This means for a piece of written content to reach the public it needs to be approved by many people who all support the content. The Lin coverage demonstrates that written context represents not just an author but a whole media outlet because ESPN and not the author of the story are being held responsible for the racist headline. Framing research supports the notion that racially based coverage is not individualized because frames are social shared and consistent over time. Mecurio and Filak (2010) suggested the mechanism behind such an idea is that younger reporters learn journalist practices from older reporters who are in positions of power. In essence, the younger generation learns to mimic the older generation in order to get more publishings, more interesting topics, and better locations in newspapers. Additionally, my thesis considers numerous other factors and antecedent conditions of frames including reporter race.

As technology allows for the media to communicate quicker, I believe the trend of seeing racially framed content will increase. Sports coverage provides a unique test of this belief because sites like ESPN are producing written content immediately after the conclusion of events, and even during the games themselves. The pressure to get this content out will likely hurry the process of coverage and reveal more racialized content similar to verbal commentary.

Developing an online version of Popnvics PICS for understanding digital relationships (COMM MIL research note)

In my recent research, I've been trying to get more into understanding the psychological dimensions of online relationships - particularly in terms of perceived closeness. I have a great respect for network analysis research that provides insight into the density of social networks, but I feel that this data at times is a bit 'cold' and assumes rather mechanistically and deterministically that we can understand the Gestalt of an interpersonal relationship merely by examining connections and communication frequency. While of course much social media research (including my own) is often more interested in connections over people, I'm trying to come up with novel ways in which to understand perceived closeness - that is, irrespective of one's location in my social media network (i.e. being proximal or more distal to myself as a node) or my communication frequency with another, what is my perception of your closeness to me?*

In looking for metrics, I came across the Perceived Interpersonal Closeness Scale developed by Popovics et al (2003) (.pdf here). They present an assessment of a graphical measure of perceived interpersonal closeness, conceptualized as (taken from the introduction of their publication):

During recent decades researchers and clinicians have shown an interest in studying and measuring closeness-related constructs, some of it in this journal (e.g. Timmerman, Emanuels-Zuurveen, & Emmelkamp, 2000). Sarason, Shearin, Pierce and Sarason (1987) defined the common factor underlying measures of perceived social support as ‘the extent to which an individual is accepted, loved and involved in relationships in which communication is open’ (p. 830). It is suggested that this core factor is interpersonal, socio-emotional closeness, a basic component and function of social support. Closeness, explicitly linked with a closeness–distance model of relationship is a richer and broader term than intimacy (Marks & Floyd, 1996).

Their paper outlines a (rather elegant) argument in defense of their graphical measure of this construct, which essentially asks respondents to place relational partners onto a "bulls-eye" style map, with those individuals placed closer to the center as being more (perceptually) close to the respondent. Their data support and validate this measure, and while I haven't seen it's application much in other areas of research, I find it both inspiring and parsimonious.

So, how do we get this measure online? My first attempt (context, this is a study on brand propinquity hence the "brand name" in parentheses):

Before we move to the next section of the survey, we want to ask you one more question about your relationship with (brand name). Below you will see an image of a target that represents how close you are with different individuals in your daily life. Using this target, we’d like you to tell us how close you currently feel to them by marking the relevant answer from the bulls-eye below. To select an answer, choose the red number in the ring of the bulls-eye that best represents how close you feel to (brand name). You can make your selection by using the drop-down list provided.

Thoughts? I need to work on the presentation quality a bit - looking into coding a Flash-based version in which respondents could 'click and drag' from a list of friends, entities, or any other individual units of analysis and snap them to the bulls-eye graphic. I'm also considering a second layer of interaction where individuals might draw perceptions of the connected-ness between the entities on the map (but that's for another time); in effect, a perceived network density map that could be compared with the more objective measures of network density gleaned from social media data.

Reference:

Popovics, M., Milne, D., & Barrett, P. (2003). The scale of perceived interpersonal closeness (PICS). Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 10, 286-301. [.pdf]

*Of course, I recognize that perceived closeness is likely strongly correlated with actual closeness from a network analysis standpoint, but I also wish to propose for the consideration that these two dimensions do not share a perfect correlation. In fact, the extent to which there is any lack of concordance between these measures becomes an interesting scientific question!

COMM MIL is the Media and Interaction Lab housed in West Virginia University's Department of Communication Studies. More information about the lab can be found here.

Wait.... We're all not hedonists?

%3Ci%3EThe+following+is+post+is+by+WVU+Communication+M.A.+student+Greg+Cranmer+on+Monday%27s+%2813+February%29+discussion+on+mood%2C+emotion%2C+and+entertainment+media.+%3C%2Fi%3E%3Cspan+class%3D%22fullpost%22%3E%0D%0A%0D%0A%22Stop+Watching+TV%2C+you%27re+melting+your+brain%21%22%26nbsp%3B+Despite+what+your+grandparents+say%2C+the+use+of+media+is+functional%2C+even+when+it+is+used+for+entertainment.%26nbsp%3B+The+traditional+conceptualization+of+entertainment+is+maximizing+pleasure+and+minimizing+pain%2C+which+is+also+known+as+hedonism.%26nbsp%3B%26nbsp%3BHedonism+has+been+culturally+ingrained+as+immoral+since+the+dark+ages%2C+thanks+to+religious+ideology+that+classified+leisure%2C+pleasure%2C+and+sin+as+synonymous.%26nbsp%3B+Classical+societies+%28e.g.%2C+the+Greeks%29+valued+not+just+leisure+but+entertainment.%26nbsp%3B+Aristotle+was+even+credited+with%26nbsp%3Bproclaiming+that+leisure+was+as+close+to+god%26nbsp%3Bas+one+could+get.%0D%0@%0D%0AIn+todays+digital+age%2C+the+use+of+media+is+not+only+popular%2C+it+is+the+main+means+of+entertainment.%26nbsp%3B+However%2C+the+difficulty+in+explaining+how+audience+members+gained%26nbsp%3Bpleasure+%28the%26nbsp%3Btraditional+definition+of+entertainment%29%26nbsp%3Bout+of+watching+tragedies+and+morally+objectionable+content+lingered.%26nbsp%3B+One+explanation+has+been+that+individuals+morally+disengage+from+content+in+order+to+gain+enjoyment.%26nbsp%3B+This+uni-dimensional+approach+%28i.e.%2C+media+consuming+always+being+pleasurable%29+depicts+the+audience+in+the+same+uni-dimensional+light%3B+they+are+essentially+reduced+to+hedonistic+creatures.%26nbsp%3B+%0D%0A%0D%0AOliver+and+Raney+%282011%29+provided+another+posible+explanation%2C+eudaimonia+%28i.e.%2C+meaningfulness%29.%26nbsp%3B+These+researchers+forwarded+that+individuals+are+entertained+not+only+by+pleasure%2C+but+also+by+meaningfulness.%26nbsp%3B+This+conclusion+answers+the+tragedy+conundrum+because%26nbsp%3Bindividuals+are+entertained+by%26nbsp%3Btruth+seeking.%26nbsp%3B+In+other+words%2C+while+individuals+do+not+enjoy+tragedy+they+appreciate+the+response+it+invokes.%26nbsp%3B+This+is+because+meaningfulness+is+about+the+self+%28e.g.%2C+self-reflection+and+self-cognition%29.%0D%0A%0D%0AHowever%2C+this+suggests+that+meaningfulness+cannot+be+accomplished+if+moral+disengagement+occurs.%26nbsp%3B+For+example%2C+it+can+be+argued+one+cannot+gain+meaningfulness+from+an+experience+if+they+remove+themselves+from+its+gravity.%26nbsp%3B+The+poet+Robert+Browning+asserted+that+it+is+through+meaningfulness+that+man+progresses%3A+%22Progress%2C+man%27s+distinctive+mark+alone%2C+not+God%27s%2C+and+not+the+beasts%27%3A+God+is%2C+they+are%2C+man+partly+is+and+wholly+hopes+to+be%22%26nbsp%3B+In+essence%2C+progress+and+meaningfulness+are+human+pursuits+alone.%0D%0A%0D%0AThe+idea+of+not+disengaging%26nbsp%3Bis+especially+relevant+for+use+of+violent+videogame+play+among+children.%26nbsp%3B+Grodal+%282002%29+suggested+that+videogames+are+an+%22emotional+labratory.%22%26nbsp%3B+His+point+was+that+while+videogames+provide+opportunities+for+a+controlled+situation%2C+they+produce+real+reactions+%28e.g.%2C+exictement%2C+fear%2C+sorrow%2C+anger%29.%26nbsp%3B+Videogames%2C+thus%2C+provide+great+platforms+to+attain+meaningful+entertainment.%0D%0A%0D%0AHowever%2C+despite+the+interest+in+these+two+motivations+for+entertainment%2C+a+relationship+between+them+has+not+been+established.%26nbsp%3B+One+unique+way+of+viewing+these+motivation+may+be+through+the+lens+of+the+Elaboration+Likelihood+Model+%28ELM%29.%26nbsp%3B+The+model+is+designed+to+explain+persuasion+and+how+it+is+achieved+in+two+ways%3A+central+and+peripheral+routes.%26nbsp%3B+The+central+route+involves+the+elaboration+of+messages+and+is+used+to+consider+ideas+and+consequences.%26nbsp%3B+The+peripheral+route%2C+however%2C+provides+a+quick+accept+or+reject+decision.%26nbsp%3B+This+results+in+the+central+route+having+the+ability+for+a+major+attitude+change+and+the+peripheral%2C+only+a+small+change.%26nbsp%3B+If+one+were+to+adapt+this+model+to+entertainment+it+is+likely+meaningfulness+could+be+equated+to+central+route+and+hedonism+could+be+equated+to+peripheral+route%2C+and+thus+meaningfulness+would+have+longer+lasting+effects+than+hedonism.%26nbsp%3B+%0D%0A%0D%0AWhat+does+the+dual%26nbsp%3B+pursuits+of+entertainment+say+about+human+nature%3F+Which+one+is+ultimately+more+important%3F%3C%2Fspan%3E

“I'm Attached, And I'm a Good Guy/Gal!”: How Character Attachment Influences Pro- and Anti-Social Motivations to Play Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games

After a rather short wait, our research team of Nick Bowman (West Virginia University), and Daniel Schultheiss and Christina Schumann (Technological University of Ilmenau) are please to announce the publication of our article "I'm Attached, And I'm a Good Guy/Gal!”: How Character Attachment Influences Pro- and Anti-Social Motivations to Play Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games" in CyberPsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking.

The study abstract:
One's feelings of intimacy and connectedness with distal, fictional media characters are referred to as parasocial interactions. Video games have challenged this concept, as the distance between game players and characters is greatly reduced, if not completely removed, in virtual environments. Games encourage the internalization and psychological merging of a player's and a character's mind, a multidimensional concept known as character attachment (CA). Data from our study suggest that dimensions of CA are useful in understanding both pro- and anti-social gaming motivations. Pro-social gamers feel a greater sense of control over their characters, while anti-social gamers are more likely to suspend their disbelief of the game environment and not take responsibility for their virtual actions. Pro-social gaming was more prevalent in older gamers, and younger male game characters were motivated by anti-social reasons.

We blogged about this study in an earlier post(here), and you can also view our presentation slides from NCA New Orleans below:

"I’m attached, and I’m a good guy!": How character attachment influences (pro-soci`l and anti-social) usage motivations

View more presentations from West Virginia University - Department of Communication Studies

Top papers in Communication and Technology - ECA 2012

A few weeks ago, we announced that our social media research team of WVU faculty Nick Bowman and David Westerman and Doctoral candidate CJ Claus had a paper recognized as a top paper in Communication and Technology for the 2012 Eastern Communication Association meeting in Cambridge, MA. The full slate of top papers for this division has been announced:

Friday (27 April) 9:00-10:15 AM Somerset Room - Royal Sonesta Boston
Top Papers in Communication and Technology

• “Finding an Optimal Match: Social Support Groups in Second Life”
Sara Green-Hamann and John C. Sherblom, University of Maine
• “How Demanding is Social Media: Understanding Social Media Diets as a Function of Perceived Costs and Benefits – a Rational Actor Perspective”
Nicholas David Bowman, David Westerman, and CJ Claus, West Virginia University
• “Video Games: An Overview of Recent Research on Aggression and the Transition toward Considering Other Types of Effects”
Ashleigh Shelton and Kenneth A. Lachlan, University of Massachusetts, Boston
• “Persuasive Technology: Transition to a Rhetorical Perspective”
Raymond A. Lutzky, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Chair: Heather Stassen-Ferrara, Western New England University
Respondent: Rod Carveth, Goodwin College

Our earlier blog post on the first draft of the paper can be accessed here. We'll look to get more information from the other authors and post accordingly!

Motives Underlying Media Selection

Guest post by WVU Communication Studies M.A. student Zac Goldman.

Media scholars continue to be interested in the motivation behind the consumption and selection of media. Early researchers like Paul Lazarsfeld indicated that people sought out media to perform one of three functions: informing, transmitting, or correlating. Numerous authors since have suggested the importance of media to also be entertaining. The growing amount of research regarding entertainment as the motivating factor and use of media is generally examined from a macro-level perspective. A narrower focus of this perspective may potentially examine how entertainment, or any motivation factor, alters the effects of the media content.

One frequently used approach to examining uses and needs of media is the Uses and Gratifications Theory (U&G). From this perspective, a generally accepted notion was constructed in that gratifications come from social and psychological needs. Although the theory has been used extensively to examine the psychological needs it has produced little predictive utility. The low predictive utility of the theory can logically be traced through the theory’s construction as it encourages recursive thinking; which brings further questions to the practicality of the theory.

The predictability (or lack thereof) of U&G is troubling and encourages alternative considerations. Now more than ever people have become active media users, rather than passive media audiences; and theoretical perspectives should reflect this.

The limited but powerful effects model examines media effects by reevaluating many of the previous models while incorporating key constructs which include the gratifications of social and psychological needs. Media content produces a cognitive, affective, or behavioral script (CAB) which is then received by the user. The user then internalizes this script with the psychological and societal needs in which they are facing. Only after the users complete the internalization will they determine whether to act on the script and demonstrate an CAB effect. In other words, the media content gives the user a puppet, but it is still the user’s decision and behavior which pull the strings and demonstrate the “effect”.

This perspective does not inherently assume that media produces what many would classify as an “effect”. Certainly the typical behavioral-based effect is possible within this model but no assumption is made that a user will demonstrate such an effect. However, as some would argue that discrepancies in the definition of media effects exist, the conversation resorts back to a macro-level perspective. If the definition of media effects shifts from its primarily behavioral connotation, the argument could be made that by learning something (from the script) which was previously unknown, an effect not only exists but it is assumed. Admittedly, this notion of media effects seems to be unpopular throughout the field.

So what are the implications? Well the importance of the user is rapidly becoming more recognized and appreciated than ever before. Previous perspectives of the media model which postulate that stimulus leads directly to response are becoming a thing of the past. The understanding of the moderator is critical in determining the importance of media effects (if any) within our society. The usage and motivation behind media consumption is arguably the starting point in conducting such research. Uses and Gratifications play a prominent role in determining the psychological needs of the user; however these needs must continue to be developed with societal needs to aid in determining their predictive utility as a moderator between the content and effects.

While the content of the media arguably gives the user the “bullets,” it is up to the user whether or not to “pull the trigger” which inevitably results in the media effect.

How does the channel affect the symbols?

(The following is a short post by WVU Communication Studies MA student Betsy Ditrinco, in reflection of our earlier class on media violence research)

In Albert Bandura’s chapter on the Social Cognitive Theory, he describes how mass media and the human brain interact to develop an understanding of our culture. In defining three human functions (symbolizing capability, self-regulatory capability, and self-reflective capability), Bandura explains how humans process information derived from mass media. The symbolizing capability “provides humans with a powerful tool for comprehending their environment and creating and regulating environmental events that touch virtually every aspect” of our lives (p. 122). The self-regulatory capability is the function that controls our motivation, emotion, and behavior through evaluations of our own behavior. Finally, self-reflective capability is how we cognitively verify our accurate thoughts against our flawed thoughts.

When we consume different forms of media, we are constantly assigning meaning to symbols and developing an understanding of our culture. The question is if media channels affect the symbols that are sent. In the aftermath of 9/11, how did we interpret the symbols that a local TV >news reporter sent differently from the messages sent by radio personalities? I would argue that radio may offer more room for visual imagination and potentially a longer connection to the image. Instead of watching the anchor tell you a story from behind a desk, you are only listening to the radio host, potentially visualizing ground-zero the entire time. There are clearly countless variances that can affect the messages sent across different forms of media; what are some that come to mind for you? Can you argue the opposite side of the radio/television example? Along these lines, there are even differences within the same medium on different channels. There are some organizations that produce extreme liberal or conservative views. Depending on the channel (or blend of channels) an individual subscribes to, this can impact the way the person views the world and verifies his or her own way of thinking. In the early 1900’s, mass media created a fear based on this idea- limited channels, limited thoughts. Now we face the reality of inconsistent symbols with varying interpretations. I would argue this leads to broader thinking and stronger critique but could you argue any negative effects?

Social Cognitive Theory and Media Effects

(The following is a short post by WVU Communication Studies MA student Jennifer Seifert, in reflection of our earlier class on media violence research)

In an explanation of Social Cognitive Theory, Bandura states that “symbolic modeling is central to full understanding of the effects of mass communication.” He argues that there are four major subfunctions that govern observational learning- attentional processes, retention processes, production processes, and motivational processes. Offering a simple explanation of each, the attentional process determines what is observed, the retention process determines what is remembered, the production process determines the plan of action, and the motivational process determines the cost/benefit of enacting a behavior.

It could be argued research centering on the effects of mass communication should measure outcomes or behaviors; however, this reflects a limited scope of the full effects of mass communication.  In the retention process, observers of mass communication transform the information they receive into "rules and conceptions of memory". Therefore, the effects of mass communication can precede the manifestation of behaviors.

Model of the Social Learning Process